A cost-effectiveness analysis of consolidation immunotherapy with durvalumab in stage III NSCLC responding to definitive radiochemotherapy in Switzerland.

BACKGROUND: Consolidation immunotherapy with the programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) inhibitor durvalumab improves survival in patients with stage III non-small-cell lung cancer responding to radiochemotherapy. The aim of this study was to assess the cost-effectiveness of durvalumab in Switzerland based on the most recent PACIFIC survival follow-up. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We constructed a Markov model based on the 3-year follow-up data of the PACIFIC trial and compared consolidation durvalumab with observation. We used published utility values and assessed costs for treatment strategies from the perspective of the Swiss health care payers. Cost-effectiveness was tested both in the intention-to-treat population of the PACIFIC trial unselected for PD-L1 tumor expression and in patients with PD-L1-expressing tumors (≥1%). RESULTS: In the unselected/PD-L1-positive patients, durvalumab showed an incremental effectiveness of 0.76/1.18 quality-adjusted life year (QALY) and incremental costs of Swiss Francs (CHF) 67 239/78 177, resulting in incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of CHF 88 703/66 131 per QALY gained, respectively. The most influential factors for the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio were the utility before first progression, costs for durvalumab, and the hazard ratio for overall survival under durvalumab versus observation. The cost-effectiveness of durvalumab was better than CHF 100 000 per QALY gained in 75% of the simulations in probabilistic sensitivity analysis. CONCLUSION: Assuming a willingness-to-pay threshold of CHF 100 000 per QALY gained, consolidation durvalumab is likely to be cost-effective both in patients with inoperable stage III non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) unselected for PD-L1 status and in patients with PD-L1-expressing tumors in Switzerland.

Cost-effectiveness of nivolumab in the treatment of head and neck cancer.

BACKGROUND: Until recently, no second-line treatment for recurrent and/or metastatic head and neck squamous cell cancer (r/mHNSCC) was able to improve overall survival (OS). Nivolumab has become a promising treatment for r/mHNSCC. The CheckMate-141 trial showed that nivolumab improves OS compared to investigator's choice (IC) (cetuximab, methotrexate, docetaxel). Treatment with immune checkpoint inhibitors is however expensive. The aim of this analysis was to assess the cost-effectiveness of nivolumab as second-line treatment for r/mHNSCC in Switzerland. METHODS: Based on the CheckMate-141 trial, we constructed a Markov model comparing nivolumab to IC, including follow-up data up to 24 months. We assessed costs for treatments from the perspective of the Swiss health system with a 60 months' time horizon. PD-L1 and p16 testing were considered in scenarios. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER) were compared to an informal willingness-to-pay of CHF (Swiss Francs) 100,000 per QALY gained. RESULTS: For the base case we estimated an incremental effectiveness of 0.35 QALYs and incremental costs of CHF 35,562 with nivolumab, resulting in an ICER of CHF 102,957 per QALY gained. Most influential drivers for the ICER were the price of nivolumab and the progressive disease state utility weights. In 45.5% of probabilistic sensitivity analysis simulations nivolumab was estimated below 100,000 CHF/QALY. Reducing the price of nivolumab according to a consented payback by 4.75%, resulted in an ICER of CHF 98,325/QALY gained. CONCLUSIONS: At current prices nivolumab has an ICER of around CHF 100,000 per QALY gained in the second line treatment of r/mHNSCC patients in Switzerland.

Palbociclib as a first-line treatment in oestrogen receptor-positive, HER2-negative, advanced breast cancer not cost-effective with current pricing: a health economic analysis of the Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer Research (SAKK).

Endocrine therapy continues to be the optimal systemic treatment for metastatic ER(+)HER2(-) breast cancer. The CDK4/6 inhibitor palbociclib combined with letrozole has recently been shown to significantly improve progression-free survival. Here we examined the cost-effectiveness of this regimen for the Swiss healthcare system. A Markov cohort simulation based on the PALOMA-1 trial (Finn et al. in Lancet Oncol 16:25-35, 2015) was used as the clinical course. Input parameters were based on summary trial data. Costs were assessed from the Swiss healthcare system perspective. Adding palbociclib to letrozole (PALLET) compared to letrozole monotherapy was estimated to cost an additional CHF342,440 and gain 1.14 quality-adjusted life years, resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of CHF301,227/QALY gained. In univariate sensitivity analyses, no tested variation in key parameters resulted in an ICER below a willingness-to-pay threshold of CHF100,000/QALY. PALLET had a 0 % probability of being cost-effective in probabilistic sensitivity analyses. Lowering PALLET's price by 75 % resulted in an ICER of CHF73,995/QALY and a 73 % probability of being cost-effective. At current prices, PALLET would cost the Swiss healthcare system an additional CHF155 million/year. Palbociclib plus letrozole cannot be considered cost-effective for the first-line treatment of patients with metastatic breast cancer in the Swiss healthcare system.

Inpatient and outpatient loop electrosurgery excision procedure for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia: a retrospective analysis.

PURPOSE: To determine whether the outpatient loop electrosurgical excision procedure (LEEP) conization (out-LEEP) is as effective and safe as inpatient LEEP conization (in-LEEP) with regard to the complete removal of cervical dysplasia, recurrence-free survival and post-operative morbidity. METHODS: 233 patients were included in this retrospective cohort study from January 2002 to December 2007. 181 had outpatient treatment and 52 inpatient treatment. We used Mann-Whitney U test, two-sided Fisher's exact test, Chi-square test, log rank test and Kaplan-Meier curve. RESULTS: Incomplete excision was found in 16/52 (30.8%) cases in the inpatient group and 46/181 (25.4%) in the outpatient group (P = 0.48). Six patients had post-operative complications: two cases of secondary haemorrhage in each group (in-LEEP 3.8%, out-LEEP 1.1%, P = 0.22) and two cases of cervical stenosis amongst inpatients (3.8%, P = 0.049). Alteration of specimen by thermal artifact were reported in 4/52 (7.7%) of in-LEEP cones and 10/181 (5.5%) of out-LEEP cones (P = 0.52). Measurements of cones in both groups were comparable with a mean depth of 9.35 mm (±5.5 mm) and 8.4 mm (±3.4 mm), respectively. CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that efficacy and safety of ambulatory LEEP conization is comparable as in inpatient procedure.

Trastuzumab beyond progression: a cost-utility analysis.

BACKGROUND: The continuation of trastuzumab beyond progression in combination with capecitabine as secondary chemotherapy for HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer (MBC) prolongs progression-free survival without a substantial increase in toxicity. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A Markov cohort simulation was used to follow the clinical course of typical patients with MBC. Information on response rates and major adverse effects was derived, and transition probabilities were estimated, based on the results of the Breast International Group 03-05 clinical trial. Direct costs were assessed from the perspective of the Swiss health care system. RESULTS: The addition of trastuzumab to capecitabine is estimated to cost on average an additional of €33,980 and to yield a gain of 0.35 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of €98,329/QALYs gained. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed that the willingness-to-pay threshold of €60,000/QALY was reached in 12% of cases. CONCLUSION: The addition of trastuzumab to capecitabine in MBC patients is more expensive than what is typically regarded as cost-effective but falls within the value ranges found for established regimens in the treatment of MBC.

Cost-effectiveness of trastuzumab in the adjuvant treatment of early breast cancer: a model-based analysis of the HERA and FinHer trial.

BACKGROUND: Routine adjuvant administration of trastuzumab (T) has been implemented in most centers, but its economic impact has not yet been well examined. METHODS: A Markov model was constructed based on clinical data of the Herceptin Adjuvant (HERA) and the Finland Herceptin (FinHer) trials. Costs from the perspective of a Swiss health care provider were calculated based on resource use. RESULTS: On the basis of HERA data, our model yielded an overall survival rate of 71.8% for the T group versus 62.8% for the control group [risk ratio (RR) = 0.87) after 10 years and 62.9% versus 52.7% (RR = 0.84) after 15 years. Cost-effectiveness resulted in 40505 Euros (EUR) per life years gained (LYG) after 10 years and 19673 EUR per LYG after 15 years. For the FinHer regimen, overall survival after 10 and 15 years resulted in 81.8% versus 66.1% (RR = 0.81) and 73.6% versus 57.0% (RR = 0.77). Costs of 8497 EUR per patient could be saved after 10 years and 9256 EUR after 15 years compared with the control group. CONCLUSION: In a long-term perspective, adjuvant T based on the HERA regimen can be considered cost-effective. The regimen used in the FinHer trial is even cost saving, but estimations are based on a single small trial.

Cost-effectiveness studies in ovarian cancer.

Ovarian cancer is the fifth leading cause of cancer-related deaths. The costs associated with this cancer impact both on the affected individual and on the health system. Screening is currently unproven as a strategy for improving outcomes for women with ovarian cancer. Randomized controlled trials, however, are underway, estimating any impact of screening with ultrasound and CA125 on ovarian cancer mortality. Paclitaxel and carboplatin combination, the standard first-line chemotherapy regimen for ovarian cancer, has not been compared with cisplatin and cyclophosphamide regarding the cost-effectiveness and cost-utility, but for paclitaxel and cisplatin, numerous studies have addressed these issues. The estimated incremental costs resulting from these studies fall well within the generally accepted range for new therapies. Although acquisition costs of new chemotherapy drugs exceed those of older drugs, the impact of costly drugs on total costs may be cost saving due to less costs related to supportive and palliative care. The most important costs for the patient, the pain and suffering associated with ovarian cancer and its treatment, are hard to quantify. Nevertheless, patients' quality of life must be considered when making a clinical decision to treat this disease. A review of available cost-effectiveness studies is presented and discussed.